By Alric Lindsay
On October 24, 2025, twenty-five-year-old Jordan Neil Ebanks was sentenced to seven years in prison by Justice Richards for the possession of an unlicensed firearm, 54 months for possession of a component part (magazine with ammunition) and 33 months for possession of unlicensed ammunition (9mm rounds). All the sentences are to run concurrently, and any time served to the date of the sentence will be taken into account.
Background
Regarding the background, it was explained that in 2024, the police, acting on information given to them, went in search of a vehicle which was said to have two male occupants with firearms.
Eventually, the police located the vehicle; when they approached, it sped off, and the police gave chase.
Reportedly, Ebanks and another person were taken from the vehicle and detained by the police. The other person cannot be named because their trial has not yet been completed.
Reportedly, the firearm magazine and ammunition were subsequently examined and tested by the police firearm expert. The firearm was found to be in good working condition, capable of discharging deadly bullets from its barrel on semi-automatic action.
It was explained in court that forensic DNA analysis conducted on swabs taken and textured areas of the firearm and from the firearm after processing found that Ebanks could not be excluded. A similar conclusion was reached about a swab of the magazine and a 9mm bullet.
When Ebanks was interviewed, he reportedly denied being in possession of a firearm or ammunition. He noted that there were other persons in the car, and he was not the driver. He said a third person got out, but he’s afraid to say who. And as soon as the car stopped, he raised his hands and surrendered. He said that he is concerned that if he speaks out against anyone, his life will be at risk. He said that he was unaware that they had a firearm and did not wish to say anything more as he would like to remain living.
Sentence
In court, it was emphasised that the mere possession of a firearm, even without any intention to use it in a criminal offence, can still pose a danger to the public because it could fall into the hands of someone who does have that intent. In the circumstances, it was stated that the maximum sentence for the offence of possession of a firearm is 20 years’ imprisonment and a fine under section 39 of the 2008 Act.
Before delivering the sentence, it was noted that the Chief Justice’s Statement on Tariffs and Guidelines for Sentencing for Certain Offences would be taken into account.
Regarding whether there were exceptional circumstances that may impact the sentence, Justice Richards said:
In the Cayman Islands, the possession of an unlicensed firearm but the purpose of self-defense or the defense of others cannot amount to exceptional circumstances relating to the offense or to the offender to result in a sentence lower than the statutory minimum years of imprisonment. If the courts were to decide otherwise, such a decision would inevitably lead to further breakdown in law and order. The possession of illegal firearms can never be tolerated.
This court respectfully adopts the words of Justice Quinn. Consideration has been given to whether there are exceptional circumstances in the instant case against the background of these authorities. The delay in obtaining a trial date does not appear to be exceptional given the length of it. The defendant’s personal circumstances taken individually or collectively do not appear to be exceptional in nature. not an exceptional circumstance. There’s nothing that would make the imposition of a mandatory minimum sentence arbitrary or disproportionate to the circumstances of the sentence.
Justice Richards concluded that the sentence for the possession of an unlicensed firearm is a mandatory minimum of seven years, 54 months for possession of a component part (magazine with ammunition) and 33 months for possession of unlicensed ammunition (9mm rounds).
Justice Richards ordered that neither the name of the co-defendant nor the name of the locations where items were picked up may be published because the co-defendant has a trial coming up.
Note to readers
“Exceptional circumstances” are frequently invoked in court for tourists who import guns and ammunition into the Cayman Islands. In those cases, it is said that tourists are licensed gun owners in their jurisdiction and the firearms were present in their luggage by accident, i.e., there was no intention to bring the firearms to the Cayman Islands. This is the case for firearms found on arrival to and departure from the Cayman Islands.
A freedom of information request was made to understand the reasons for the difference in treatment between Caymanians and tourists; however, the request to review the records was blocked. See the previous story on this below:
